That was in response to McCain saying he would appoint Supreme Court justices who would use original intent. Entirely appropriate I think.
Dredd Scott was an originalist decision, the philosophy trumpeted by the Federalist Society, who McCain openly supports. Not saying they'd reinstitute slavery, but a lot of 'em would sure like to roll back the New Deal and all those 'constitutional irregularities' like the EPA, OSCHA, etc.
I thought the slavery comment was a bit too far, but it was appropriate in the context of interpetting the constitution, what kind of nitwit wants a judge who would interpet the constitution based upon 1780s conditions? There is a reason the constitution is amendable....because the 1780s ......are long gone and the problems today are much different. DD
I didn't think they grilled him that badly...From what you guys have been saying, I thought it would be really bad. I think Palin on ABC was worse than this
McCain did not look good here. But neither did Whoopi. They kinda ganged up on him, but he didn't handle it well. Couldn't give straight answers. Sounds like the republican platform is all media soundbytes and no substance.
I thought the slavery comment was great. Not because McCain wants slaves, but because it illustrates the lack of understanding on his part of law in general. Too often right wingers simply mouth platitudes and slogans about their judicial philosophy without knowing or realizing what they are saying or why - they simply say what the party wants them to say ("Activist judges!"). This shallowness should be exposed for all to see. If McCain is going to shoot his mouth off about his support of originalism - he should be able to explain what it is and why. He can't do that, which is what was shown. These are the people who have been picking judges for the last 8 years. Travesty.
I completely agree with you on this ... but to be fair, both sides do this. If you really think you candidate is the best offering from your party (both sides), then you are delusional. Obama is no different than any other politician. IMO, the vice presidents are better picks than our current choices. The race card comment is exactly the problem in america about racism ... both sides simply can not let it go . We're on the edge of electing a black man and she wants to bring up this ignorant comment? epic FAIL!
You don't think Obama could do a better job of talking about judicial appointments and constitutional law? A former Harvard Law Review editor in chief and a former Professor at UC law school who ? I disagree - I have seen him lecture live in person. I can tell you first hand that he can talk about these things competently - that's an understatement. And I do think he is the best offering that we have at this point. I value intelligence in a President very highly. It's a job which requires the assimilation of a lot of information in a short time span - that's something we have sorely lacked over the last 8 years, and something that MCain and Palin have shown that they are not very apt to do.
Yikes. Forget the worries of Sarah Palin talking to Putin...if McCain gets his milkshake drank by the yappy hags on The View, I can't imagine what people with actual intelligence and power would do to him.
Can you elaborate please? I asked somebody the same thing, and they gave me a dumb answer like no experience can be a good thing.
au contre, the comment underscored how how out-of-touch with reality McCain is he longs for the 1780 conditions, when it was legal to own slaves and women can't vote
Three burning questions: Of the august body that wrote the Constitution, how many were lawyers? Are we trying to say here that only lawyers are fit to pick judges? At which levels of the judiciary do you have to be a lawyer to be a judge?
Okay now, I've finally watched the View videos on HuffPo... This is the great victory you want to claim? McCain effortlessly handled their extreme and ridiculous speculations and constant interruptions. Whoopi thinks that the president doing his job separated from faith can do better for the American people than what God would do...
Thirty-five were lawyers or had benefited from legal training, though not all of them relied on the profession for a livelihood. Some had also become judges. link I don't think anyone's saying that. Well, the Bush administration kind of did when they were the first administration to stop looking at the ABA's recommendations for candidates and deferring to more outrightly political groups. It is likely that as a lawyer and law professor Obama would have a greater understanding of the implicaiton of his picks. It's puzzling that McCain sights Roberts and Alito as his ideal judges, when both of them were part of the majority that eviscerated the McCain-Feingold act. link None. James F. Byrnes was the last Supreme Court Justice to be appointed without a law degree (1941 ). But given the increasingly complex nature and scope of constitutional issues, a law degree has become an unspoken prerequisite. In fact, serious time as a law professor, a US Circuit Court Judge, etc. is de rigeur. Scalia was a professor at Chicago, Ginsberg at Columbia, Breyer at Harvard. All the justices served on a high level appellate court before they were nominated. Hopefully the burning has now abated...
